HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4827-B Staff AnalysisDecember 17, 2001
ITEM NO.: A
File No.:
Owner:
Address:
Description:
Zoned:
Variance Requested:
Z -4827-B
Turner Holdings, LLC
6901 Interstate 30
Lots 5 and 7, Tucker's
Commercial Acres
I-2
Variances are requested from
the building line provisions df
Section 31-12 and the easement
provisions of Section 36-11.
justification: The applicant wishes to
. construct building additions
to the existing Gold Star Dairy
which cross the front platted
building line and the platted
side building lines and
easements between the two lots.
Present Use of Property: Industrial
Proposed Use of Property: Industrial
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
With Building Permit:
1. Proposed building addition is in the floodway. City
of Little Rock prohibits building in the floodway;
however, a floodway study could be done to mitigate
impact on the floodway at this location with the
possibility of removing this location from the
floodway. Contact Vince Floriani at 371-4817 for
details.
December 17, 2001
Item No.: A
B.
Lan dsca a and Buffer Issues:
An upgrade in landscaping
Landscape Ordinance equal
(46%) will be required.
for details.
C. Staff Analysis:
toward compliance with the
to the expansion proposed
Contact Bob Brown at 371-4864
The property at 6901 Interstate 30 is zoned I-2 and is
occupied by the existing Gold Star Dairy development.
The development consists of Lots 5 and 7, Tucker's
Commercial Acres. There is a platted 40 foot buildilrq
line along the front of both lots, with a 30 foot side
building line and a 10 foot easement on each side of
the dividing lot line.
The applicant proposes to construct two (2) building
additions to the existing dairy building which encroach
into the front and side platted building lines and over
the existing 20 foot easement (10 foot easement on each
side of the dividing lot line). The first proposed
addition is a new tank room located on the front of the
existing building which encroaches seven feet over the
40 foot platted front building line. The second is a
building addition on the east side of the building
which will contain additional office space, dry storage
and refrigerated storage. This building addition is
proposed to encroach over the 30 foot side platted
building lines and 10 foot utility easements. There
are also several smaller additions which the applicant
proposes to make to the rear of the existing building
(new tanks and tank room, ice builders and truck
leveler) .
There are two outstanding issues associated with this
application. The first issue is that the applicant
needs to provide staff with a revised site plan and
additional information so that a complete staff review
can be conducted. Staff has requested the following
information from the applicant:
1. Existing and proposed building area for each use
(office, storage, tank rooms, etc.)
2. Existing and proposed building heights
2
December 17, 2001
Item No.: A
3. Parking details, including total number of paved
parking spaces.
4. Sign -offs from all of the public utility companies
regarding the proposed building additions.
The second outstanding issue relates to the floodway
study required by Public Works. As noted by Public
Works, the property is in the floodway and new building
construction in the floodway is prohibited. The
applicant has informed staff that a floodway study will
be done. The applicant needs to provide staff with a
letter stating the name of the firm which will conduct
the floodway study and the anticipated length of time
the study will take to complete. This information will
be considered by staff during additional review of this
application.
Based on the outstanding issues as noted above, staff
will request that this application be deferred. When
the applicant provides staff with the requested
additional information, staff will be able to conduct
an additional and more thorough review of this
application.
D. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends that this application be deferred to
the November 26, 2001 Board of Adjustment agenda.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(OCTOBER 29, 2001)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present.
Staff recommended that the application be deferred to the
November 26, 2001 agenda, to give the applicant time to
submit additional information to staff. Staff noted that
the applicant had agreed to the deferral.
The applicant offered no additional comments.
The application was placed on the Consent Agenda and
deferred to the November 26, 2001 agenda by a vote of
5 ayes, 0 nays and 0 absent.
3
December 17, 2001
Item No.: A
Staff U date
The applicant has submitted the additional information and a
revised site plan as requested by staff. Existing and
proposed building area for each use (office, storage,
processing, etc.), existing/proposed building heights,
existing parking details and sign -offs from all of the
public utility companies have been submitted to staff. Upon
further review of this application, staff has determined
that three (3) additional variances are required and have
been requested by the applicant.
The first is a variance to allow construction of two (2) -of
the proposed tanks with an increased building height. Two
(2) of the proposed new tanks are proposed to have a height
of 71.7 feet, from the base of the tank to the top of the
guardrail. These tanks are to be located at the rear of the
existing building. Section 36-320(d) allows a maximum
building height of 45 feet for structures in I-2 zoning.
The applicant notes that the proposed building additions and
additional new tanks will not exceed the 45 foot height
allowance. Several of the existing tanks are 49 feet in
height.
The second additional requested variance is from the minimum
off-street parking standards of Section 36-502. The
ordinance requires a minimum of 68 parking spaces based on
the following existing and proposed building areas:
Existing Office 5,000 SF
Existing Storage 10,519 SF
Existing Processing 19,249 SF
Existing Mechanical Space 1,351 SF
Existing Building Total SF 36,119 SF
New Office 2,400 SF
New Dry Storage 4,100 SF
New Refrigerated Storage 10,000 SF
New Addition Total SF= 16,500 SF
Total Square Footage: 52,619 SF
Ell
December 17, 2001
Item No.: A
According to the applicant, there will be a total of 45
paved parking spaces remaining at the northwest corner of
the property after the proposed building addition. The
applicant notes that the facility is a 24-hour operation and
the employees arrive in shifts. Additionally, the truck
drivers park their personal vehicles (and have for a number
of years) within the fenced gravel area for security
reasons. The applicant has stated that the 45 remaining
parking spaces will be more than sufficient to serve the
business.
The third additional variance request is from Section 8,
Article IV, the "Flood Loss Prevention" section, to allow''
new building construction within the floodway. Section
8-284 requires that variances to allow new construction in
the floodway be granted by the Board of Adjustment. Laha
Engineers, Inc. has provided the Public Works Department
with floodway calculations related to the proposed
development of the property. Public Works has noted
agreement with the calculations (see letter dated November
6, 2001 from David Hamilton, P.E.). However, the applicant
must submit a floodproofing plan to Public Works for review
and approval. Staff will attempt to have this issue
resolved prior to the public hearing.
Otherwise, staff supports the requested variances. Staff
feels that the variances to allow encroachment over platted
building lines, encroachment into an existing utility
easement, increased building height for two (2) of the
proposed tanks, a reduced number of off-street paved parking
spaces and building construction within the floodway, are
reasonable and will allow the applicant a needed expansion
of the existing business. Additionally, the proposed
building additions, with variances, will have no adverse
impact on the abutting properties or the general area. The
property is located along a major interstate, with
industrial zoned property to the north and south and a large
area of floodway to the east.
If the Board approves the building line variances, the
applicant will have to complete a one -lot replat reflecting
the changes in the building lines for the proposed building
additions. The applicant should review the filing
procedures with the Circuit Clerk's office to determine if
the replat requires a revised Bill of Assurance.
5
December 17, 2001
Item No.: A
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested variances,
subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the Landscape and Buffer requirements
as noted in paragraph B. of this report.
2. The applicant must submit a floodproofing plan to
Public Works for review and approval.
3. A one -lot replat reflecting the changes in the
building lines as approved by the Board.
nnnun ov ADJUSTMENT: (NOVEMBER 26, 2001)
The applicant, Troy Laha, along with other representatives
of the property ownership, were present. There were no
objectors present. Staff informed the Board that the issue
relating to the required notice of property owners within
200 feet of the site needed to be discussed. Staff
explained the requirements for notification.
Troy Laha addressed the Board and noted that the property
owner to the south, Mountain Pure Water Company, signed a
letter of notification on this date (November 26, 2001).
Staff noted that the notification as completed by the
applicant did not conform to the Board of Adjustment bylaw$.
There was a general discussion pertaining to this issue.
There was a motion to defer the application to the
December 17, 2001 agenda, to allow the applicant time to
complete the notifications to property owners as required by
the Board's bylaws. The motion passed by a vote of 4 ayes,
0 nays and 1 absent. The application was deferred to the
December 17, 2001 agenda.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(DECEMBER 17, 2001)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present.
Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval.
The applicant offered no additional comments.
December 17, 2001
Item No .: A
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as
recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays.
7